The Supreme Court must now decide whether Netanyahu’s dismissal of the intelligence chief was lawful—or an act of retaliation against a defiant security official.
The director of Shin Bet, the Israel’s domestic intelligence agency, alleged on Monday that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s attempt to fire him earlier this year came after he refused to carry out improper requests—including surveilling anti-government demonstrators and interfering with the prime minister’s ongoing corruption trial.
In a sworn affidavit submitted to Israel’s Supreme Court, Shin Bet chief Ronen Bar claimed that Netanyahu’s move to dismiss him in March was not motivated by professional concerns but by what the prime minister perceived as a lack of personal allegiance.
Netanyahu’s office swiftly rejected the allegations, calling the affidavit “full of lies.”
The attempted ouster of Bar sparked widespread protests and was temporarily blocked by the Supreme Court after watchdog groups and opposition lawmakers argued that the dismissal violated legal procedures. Critics have accused Netanyahu’s government of eroding key democratic institutions, while his Likud party has countered by accusing Bar of disloyalty and turning parts of Shin Bet into a “private militia of the Deep State.”
A clash over October 7 failures—and more
The government has defended Netanyahu’s decision, citing a loss of confidence in Bar over Shin Bet’s failure to prevent the October 7 Hamas attack, the deadliest day in Israel’s history.
But in the declassified sections of his affidavit, Bar contended that the push to remove him began more than a year after the attack. He pointed to a series of events between November 2024 and February 2025 that, in his view, triggered Netanyahu’s actions.
Among them were Shin Bet probes into leaks of classified military documents to the media, potential ties between Netanyahu’s associates and Qatar, and an internal Shin Bet review of its pre-October 7 missteps—which reportedly highlighted government negligence in heeding prior warnings.
Refusal to interfere in protests and trial
Bar also stated that he declined to approve a security request that would have effectively delayed Netanyahu’s testimony in his corruption trial. The prime minister, who denies all charges, began giving evidence in December. His office denied ever seeking a postponement.
Additionally, Bar accused Netanyahu of pressuring Shin Bet to take action against anti-government protesters—a demand he refused.
Netanyahu’s office fired back, asserting that Bar’s affidavit only confirmed his “miserable failure” on October 7. “That alone justifies his dismissal,” it said. The statement also denied that the move was linked to the so-called “Qatargate” investigation into alleged financial ties between Qatar and Netanyahu allies, insisting: “The dismissal wasn’t meant to stop the probe—the probe was meant to stop the dismissal.”
Bar has acknowledged Shin Bet’s shortcomings ahead of the October 7 attack and has said he will resign before his term ends.
The Supreme Court heard arguments on April 8 from watchdogs and opposition lawmakers, who alleged Bar’s firing violated due process and was tainted by conflicts of interest. A ruling remains pending.
Keep Independent Journalism Alive
In a world flooded with noise, independent journalism is more vital than ever. We work hard to bring you clear, accurate, and unbiased international news — free from corporate or political influence.If you believe in the power of honest reporting, please consider making a donation. Every contribution, big or small, helps us stay independent and keep the world informed.
Support us via PayPalYour support makes a difference.
